Article 7 — Whether Christ was able to merit for others

Seventh, it is asked whether Christ was able to merit for others. (Parallel texts: In II Sent d. 20, q. 2, a. 3, ad 3; In III Sent., d. 18, a. 6, qa. 1; ST I.114.6; III.19.4;III.48.1; Comp. theol., ch. 231.)

Obj. 1: It seems not, for Christ did not merit except insofar as he was a man; but other men are not able to merit condignly for others; therefore, neither can Christ.

Obj. 2: Furthermore, just as merit consists in an act of virtue, so also does praise; but no one is praised for the work of someone else, but only from one's own; therefore, neither is another's work imputed to someone as merit, and so Christ's works are not meritorious for others.

Obj. 3: Furthermore, Christ is the Church's head inasmuch as he holds the primacy in the Church, as is clear from Galatians 1; (It is actually Colossians 1:18; Ephesians 1:22.) but other prelates holding primacy in the Church cannot merit for their subjects; therefore, neither was Christ able.

Obj. 4: Furthermore, Christ's merit was, in itself, equally related to all men: therefore, if Christ merited salvation for someone, he merited for all; but Christ's merit cannot be frustrated; therefore, all attain salvation, which is clearly false.

Obj. 5: Furthermore, just as Christ is the head of men, so also of the angels; but he did not merit for the angels; therefore neither did he for men.

Obj. 6: Furthermore, if Christ was able to merit for others, any one of his actions was meritorious for us; but only for salvation; therefore, his Passion was not necessary for our salvation.

Obj. 7: Furthermore, whatever can be done by one is superfluous if done by two; but the grace which is given to men is sufficient for man to merit eternal life for himself; therefore, it would be superfluous if Christ merited it for us.

Obj. 8: Furthermore, Christ either merited for us sufficiently or insufficiently: if sufficiently, then our merit is not necessary for salvation, but if insufficiently, it was of an insufficient grace; both of these are inadmissible; therefore Christ did not merit for us.

Obj. 9: Furthermore, just as something necessary for glory was lacking from Christ's members before his Passion, so also is this now the case; but he does not merit for us now; therefore, neither did he merit for us then.

Obj. 10: Furthermore, if Christ merited for us, our condition would have been changed by his merit; but man's condition seems to be the same after Christ just as it was before, for the devil was able to tempt beforehand though not coerce just as now, likewise, punishment was due to sinners then as now, and meritorious works were required for the just then as now; therefore Christ did not merit for us.

Obj. 11: Furthermore, in Psalm 61:13 (According to Augustine, Enarrationes in Psalmos, Ps 61:13 (PL 36:741).) it says you render to each according to his works; but this would not be the case if Christ's merits were imputed to us; therefore, Christ did not merit for us.

Obj. 12: Furthermore, reward is measured according to the root of merit; therefore, if Christ merited for us, the reward of glory would be rendered to each of us according to the quantity of Christ's grace, which seems to be false.

Obj. 13: Furthermore, what is given for merits is rendered rather than given freely; therefore if Christ merited justification for us, it seems that we are not justified freely by God, and so grace will not be grace; therefore Christ merited nothing for us.

On the contrary (1), Christ satisfied for us: 1 John 2:2, he is the propitiation for our sins; but there cannot be satisfaction without merit; therefore Christ merited for us.

Furthermore (2), in a natural body the head works not only for itself but also for all the members; but Christ is the head of his own body, namely of the Church; therefore his activity was meritorious for the members.

Furthermore (3), Christ and the Church are like a single person; but he speaks in the person of the Church by reason of that unity, as is clear from the Gloss on Psalm 21:2, (Glossa ordinaria, at Ps 21:1, 3.571 (PL 113:873); Peter Lombard, Commentary on the Psalms, at Ps 21:2 (PL 191:227A).) God, my God, look upon me, and so on; therefore, in a similar way, by reason of the previously mentioned unity, Christ was able to merit in the person of others, as it were.

I answer that it must be said that human works informed by grace have value for attaining eternal life in two ways, according to which there are two things by which a man falls short of the attainment of glory. The first of these is the person's unworthiness, as is clear in one who does not have charity, who is neither suitable nor worthy for possessing eternal life; and in this respect human effort is valid for obtaining eternal life inasmuch as by it a certain dignity and suitability within man acquires a right for attaining glory; for just as an act of sin results in a certain deformity of the soul, so also does a meritorious act result in a certain beauty and dignity of the soul; and merit is called "condign" from this fact. Something else, by which man fails to attain glory, is the interposition of an obstacle, such that man, who is otherwise worthy, does not attain glory; and this is the debt of some penalty, as is manifest in the case of the justified man who owes some temporal punishment; and in this case human effort is ordered to glory in the manner of a price by which he is absolved from the debt of the penalty; and by this, human effort possesses a notion of satisfaction.

Therefore, with respect to both of these, Christ's works were more efficacious than the works of other men. For one is not rendered worthy for the reception of glory by the works of other men, but rather, only the one who performs the works, insofar as one man is not able to spiritually influence another; and so one man cannot merit grace or eternal life for another condignly. But Christ was able to have a spiritual influence over other men according to his own humanity: and so his works could cause worthiness and the attainment of glory in others. And therefore he was able to merit for others condignly, since he was able to influence others inasmuch as his humanity was the instrument of the divinity, according to Damascene. (Cf. John Damascene, On the Orthodox Faith, bk. 3, ch. 15 (PG 94:1060A); ch. 19 (PG 94:1080B).) Similarly, with respect to the second of these, a greater efficacy is understood to be in Christ than in other men: for although a man could make satisfaction for another, so long as he is constituted in grace, yet he cannot satisfy for the whole of nature; for the works of a mere man do not measure up to the good of all nature. But Christ's works had a certain dignity, inasmuch as he was God and man, such that they were worth the goodness of the whole of nature; and so he was able to make satisfaction for nature.

Reply Obj. 1: To the first it must be said that Christ is more worthy than other men inasmuch as he is man; hence, it is not necessary that what belongs to other men should belong to the man Christ.

Reply Obj. 2: To the second it must be said that an act of virtue has the notion of praise by comparison with the agent, and therefore one cannot be praised for the action of another; but it has the notion of merit by its order to an end, for which one can be made suitable by Christ's influence; and so Christ was able to merit for us.

Reply Obj. 3: To the third it must be said that Christ holds the primacy in the Church by his own power, but other prelates inasmuch as they represent the person and hold the place of Christ; hence, Christ could merit for the faithful as for his own members, but not other prelates.

Reply Obj. 4: To the fourth it must be said that Christ's merit is related to all men equally with regards to its sufficiency, but not with respect to its efficacy; which partly occurs from free choice, and partly from divine choice, by which the effect of Christ's merits are mercifully conferred on some, but from others it is withdrawn by a just judgment.

Reply Obj. 5: To the fifth it must be said that since meriting pertains to a wayfarer, one cannot merit except for a wayfarer, for something which falls under merit must be lacking from the one for whom one merits. However, angels are not wayfarers with respect to the essential reward, and so he merited nothing for them in this respect; but they are wayfarers with respect to an accidental reward, (Cf. above: q. 12, a. 13, resp.; q. 26, a. 6, ad 8.) inasmuch as they minister to us, because of which Christ's merit is also valid for them: hence, it says in Ephesians 1:10 that whatever is in heaven and whatever is on earth is restored through him.

Reply Obj. 6: To the sixth it must be said that although any act of Christ is meritorious for us, yet it was necessary that he should endure death in the place of all so as to make satisfaction for the guilt of human nature, which was liable to death by the divine sentence, as is clear in Genesis 2:17.

Reply Obj. 7: To the seventh it must be said that the grace which is personally given to someone suffices with respect to what pertains to the person himself, though not for absolving the guilt of the whole nature. This is clear in the case of the fathers of old who, while possessing grace, were not able to attain to glory because of nature's guilt; and thus Christ's merit and satisfaction was needed so that the guilt could be removed. Also, personal grace was never given to anyone after the first man's sin, except by explicit or implicit faith in the mediator.

Reply Obj. 8: To the eighth it must be said that Christ's merit works sufficiently as a universal cause of human salvation, but this cause must be applied to each person by the sacraments and by formed faith, which works through love; (Cf. Gal. 5:6.) and so something else is required for our salvation besides Christ's merit, yet of which Christ's merit is the cause.

Reply Obj. 9: To the ninth it must be said that the likeness does not hold, for meriting only pertains to wayfarers. But Christ was both a wayfarer and a possessor before the Passion; however, now he is only a possessor. Therefore, he was able to merit, although now he cannot merit. That argument is also deficient in that nothing of glory is lacking to the blessed, who are mystical members of Christ, and who delight not only the vision of the divine essence, but also in the glorified humanity of Christ.

Reply Obj. 10: To the tenth it must be said that the human condition changed much after Christ's Passion, for now with the guilt of human nature being expiated, men can freely fly up to heaven; also, eternal punishments owed for personal sins are remitted by faith in Christ's Passion, and temporal ones are diminished by the power of the keys, in which Christ's Passion works; also, demons are repressed in virtue of Christ's Passion, so that they are unable to tempt so violently; also, many helps are given to the faithful to resist temptations; likewise, the grace to merit is given in the sacraments by the power of Christ's Passion.

Reply Obj. 11: To the eleventh it must be said that Christ and his members are one mystical person, hence the works of the head belong in some way to the members; and so when something is given by God to us on account of Christ's works, this is not contrary to what it says in Psalm 61:13: you give to each according to his works. And yet Christ's works are profitable for us such that they cause grace in us by the sacraments, by which we are incited to meritorious works.

Reply Obj. 12: To the twelfth it must be said that Christ's merit is related to our reward as a first and remote cause; and so it does not measure up to his merit, but rather to that merit which is the proximate cause, which consists in the proper action of one to whom the reward is given.

Reply Obj. 13: To the thirteenth it must be said that attaining the efficacy of Christ's merit is bestowed gratuitously upon any one of us; and so the essence of grace is not made void because of this.